Resolutions, opinions and reports search tool

The City Council wants to access the workers of a concessionary company for the municipal gardening service, road cleaning and waste collection, in order to study the economic data for the purpose of assessing a possible subrogation of the service. To this end, check whether certain data of the workers are personal data and whether the city council has a legal basis to obtain this information. Data on the date of birth, professional category, type of contract and date of termination of the contract of the employees of the concessionary company referred to in the inquiry shall be considered personal data, even if provided separately of the first and last names of the working people. The city council has an authorization or legal basis to receive this information from the concessionaire given the provisions derived from both the local regime regulations and the public procurement regulations. However, the delivery must comply with the rest of the principles of the data protection regulations, in particular the principle of minimization, so it is not justified to include the first and last names of the working people affected.

The regulations of data protection do not block the access of the town councilor to information about the ascribed staff to the provision of the services of cleaning for the adjudicator companies consistent in the four last figures of the number of DNI, concrete tasks, regime of dedication and perceived dirty remunerations, when it being itself a matter of data necessary for the correct exercise of its functions of control and taxation of the management of the service carried out by these entities.

The communication of data about remunerations of the managerial charges or organs of direction and administration on the part of the private entities that they manage public services and/or that perceive helps and subsidies, in the foreseen suppositions in the 3.2 and 15.2 LTC articles, as well as its publication on the part of the responsible Administration would be justified for the fulfillment of the purpose of transparency and has the legal habilitation to the effects of the that the article foresees 11.2.a) of the LOPD.

Of the studied regulations it does not transpire from there being a general habilitation that forces to the lender companies of a regular service of transport of travellers to giving to the forces and to security corps a list of passengers. This without harm of the possibility of the staff of inspection of the transport being able to require directly its identification to the affected persons, and of the possibility of the forces and security corps being able to make concrete requests of information in the foreseen suppositions in the article 22 of the LOPD.

In the examined case, the dealer company of the public service of management of the sport facilities, since it decides, the contents and the use of the treatment of the particulars of the subscribers to the service, about the purpose it has consideration of responsible for the treatment. The fact that the Town Council carries out the temporary kidnapping of this service in principle does not seem that it has to entail necessarily the cession of the data of the subscribers on the part of the dealer company. Otherwise, the communication of these data in the Town Council, without consent, could find habilitation in the article 11.2.c) of the LOPD, in attention to the authorities that the regulations of local regime attribute to the titular administration of the service (the Town Council).

The dealer company, as a responsible for several files, can treat the data that restrain themselves there, without harm that the Town Council as a headline of the service is the last responsible for this information. Any communication of data of the Census or of other files of the Town Council is a communication of data subjected to the regime of the LOPD (articles 11 and 21), except if an order of the treatment (article 12 of the LOPD and articles 20 to 22 of the RLOPD) is established. The formalization of the order can be made in the specific clauses included in the contract, if it is proper through an annex or addendum.

The management of the supply d’aigua of l’Ajuntament is a municipal public service that implies the data processing by itself personal necessary to be able to loan and to charge the service to the user citizens. In case that l’Ajuntament s’hagi configured as a responsible for the treatment and the corresponding contract d’encàrrec with l’empresa has established dealer of the service, l’Ajuntament can access in any moment to the linked particulars the provision of the service. In case there is not this contract d’encàrrec and the responsible for the file was l’empresa dealer, the communication of particulars from the files of l’empresa dealer in l’Ajuntament it could find habilitation well in the consent of the user persons, or in l’article 11.2.c) of the LOPD.

The Town Council, as titular public administration of the service, will be able to access all the personal information that has treated like management of sport facilities the dealer entity for the provision of the service. The communication of particulars from the files of private titularity of the dealer entity in the Town Council could find habilitation in the article 11.2.c) of the LOPD, if the customers of the dealer entity, in the moment of giving its particulars, know the municipal titularity of the service, in so far as these data are necessary to be able to develop, to fulfill and to control the juridical relation that the company maintains with them and that they have freely accepted. The Town Council, as an assign of the data that the dealer entity facilitates him, taking into account that it has not collected the data directly of the person concerned, should comply with the duty of information in accordance with the section 4 of the article 5 of the LOPD, unless the interested persons have been informed of it formerly.

The Town Council, as titular public administration of the service, will be able to access all the personal information that has treated like management of sport facilities the dealer entity for the provision of the service. The communication of particulars from the files of private titularity of the dealer entity in the Town Council could find habilitation in the article 11.2.c) of the LOPD, if the customers of the dealer entity, in the moment of giving its particulars, know the municipal titularity of the service, in so far as these data are necessary to be able to develop, to fulfill and to control the juridical relation that the company maintains with them and that they have freely accepted. The Town Council, as an assign of the data that the dealer entity facilitates him, taking into account that it has not collected the data directly of the person concerned, should comply with the duty of information in accordance with the section 4 of the article 5 of the LOPD, unless the interested persons have been informed of it formerly.

The communication of data between a private company and a Town Council cannot be protected in a contract of treatment order when its formalization is not proved with the forecasts of the article 12.2 of the LOPD. The communication of particulars linked to the provision of the local service of field of golf among an entity dealer and a Town Council would find habilitation legal in what orders the article 11.2.a) of the LOPD if the citizens was informed duly of the information retiring for the provision of a municipal service. Otherwise, the communication could also find habilitation in the article 11.2.c) of the LOPD in so far as it is a matter of information that has to be communicated to the municipal entity for the exercise of the functions that correspond to him as a headline of the service.